Breaking the last great taboo: how irrational religious belief is hurting mankind as a whole

Originally posted by Simplynoone
Hey at least I watched it ....I also got through about 21 minutes of the first one.
Still listening to it .....even though I agree with alot of what he says about EXTREMISTS ...the rest is just lumping everyone into one lump ...really fair of him isnt it ..NOT >.

Let's say hypothetically there were these political groups, and those political groups were all basing their decisions on a report issued in 1965. Now let's say that the report has been interpreted by different political groups in different ways.
If the decisions some of these groups were making were irrational, dangerous, and at times delusional, you could easily argue that this original document was the root cause of the decisions.
You could also use the arguement that all of the groups were basing their decisions on a report that was causing some of them to make irrational, dangerous, and at times delusional decisions.

The gist of it is faith in anything except Science etc ...is the last taboo that needs to be gotten rid of ...and the Athiests and non faithists can live happily ever after ..with no more crime...no more evil ...no more killings ...just a happy world ...yeah ok ...NOT

No, the gist of it is that there is a set of documents that are followed by a large number of people, and that some of those people have irrational, dangerous, and at times delusional beliefs and behavior due to this set of documents. And that this situation should be looked at closely, but there's a taboo around religions that needs to be broken.

Originally posted by funky monk
reply to post by ashamedamerican

 

But the thing is that you have you started a thread on religion, started going on about how a lot of reigious beliefs are delusional and then you go and tell all the religios people to not defend what they believe.

I assume you're referring to this quote:
"Since people are coming into the thread defend their side of the arguement without reading the page"
I didn't "tell all the religios people to not defend what they believe" I made the comment that alot of people are coming into the thread to spout their religious dogma, idiology, and rhetoric without actually reading what's in the thread.
They are literally defending one side of the arguement, without first hearing the arguement. Which is a good example how these beliefs cause irrational behavior. Not many intelligent people would do that, unless they had been brainwashed by a document to believe it's heresy to speak a solitary bad word against their beliefs, no matter what those words said.

On topic tho: Religious beliefs arent hurting mankind..... people are. Its like saying that guns kill people or video games kill people. Religion doesnt hurt mankind, people hurt mankind.
And its pretty obvious that in EVERY aspect of society there are going to be hypocritical people and people who arent doing mankind any good. So dont go and act like athiests are the only good people in this world just because of a few "christians" or "religious" people screwed you over or whatever.

mmmm, how about a bit of 1 John 2 - 3 anyone?

I didn't say that "athiests are the only good people in this world" but thank you for trying to put words in my mouth, misrepresenting someone else's comments and being intellectually dishonest are very rational things to do in defense of a book.
'a few "christians" or "religious" people' didn't screw me over, this isn't a personal vendetta it is rationalization of an irrational set of documents.

Originally posted by ashamedamerican

I assume you're referring to this quote:
"Since people are coming into the thread defend their side of the arguement without reading the page"
I didn't "tell all the religios people to not defend what they believe" I made the comment that alot of people are coming into the thread to spout their religious dogma, idiology, and rhetoric without actually reading what's in the thread.
They are literally defending one side of the arguement, without first hearing the arguement. Which is a good example how these beliefs cause irrational behavior. Not many intelligent people would do that, unless they had been brainwashed by a document to believe it's heresy to speak a solitary bad word against their beliefs, no matter what those words said.

Well with a thread title like "Breaking the last great taboo: how irrational religious belief is hurting mankind as a whole" you cant expect some people to come into the thread and not look at the whole thread esp when your opening to the thread is

I personally believe that organized religion does mankind more harm than good.
I don't believe that we need a hypocritical book to tell us how to be moral, while that same book tells you that you should do immoral things to people based on theological beliefs.

Its not that hard to guess from the title what the thread is going to be about.

Originally posted by ashamedamerican


I didn't say that "athiests are the only good people in this world" but thank you for trying to put words in my mouth, misrepresenting someone else's comments and being intellectually dishonest are very rational things to do in defense of a book.

.......

You sit there and imply that you believe that all organised religion is bad "organized religion does mankind more harm than good" - by saying something like that you are implying that we would all be better off without religion - in essence this is saying that religion is bad and only out of atheism come all things that are good - its not that hard to work out what you are trying to say here.

Im not off defending a book btw.... the book is not what I worship, its God who I worship. I am simply defending my way of life becasue you are off making religion out to be the big evil of this world.

[edit on 14/12/2008 by funky monk]

Originally posted by funky monk
Well with a thread title like "Breaking the last great taboo: how irrational religious belief is hurting mankind as a whole" you cant expect some people to come into the thread and not look at the whole thread esp when your opening to the thread is

I personally believe that organized religion does mankind more harm than good.
I don't believe that we need a hypocritical book to tell us how to be moral, while that same book tells you that you should do immoral things to people based on theological beliefs.

Its not that hard to guess from the title what the thread is going to be about.

I don't go into a thread and start posting until I have at least read the thread and the information provided. It would be ignorant of me to do so, maybe I am wrong to expect people to do more than read the thread title before they start posting. Who needs an opening arguement or information to formulate a counter arguement?

You sit there and imply that you believe that all organised religion is bad "organized religion does mankind more harm than good" - by saying something like that you are implying that we would all be better off without religion - in essence this is saying that religion is bad and only out of atheism come all things that are good - its not that hard to work out what you are trying to say here.

"you are implying that we would all be better off without religion"
That is exactly what I am implying.

"in essence this is saying that religion is bad and only out of atheism come all things that are good"
I already stated: "I believe he is an Atheist where as I am not. The mathematics inherant in nature will itself represent an arguement for the existence of one or many gods."

This is why you should read before you post. So that you have a clue what you are talking about when you post.
You know what they say about assumptions.
And now that I think of it, coming to a conclusion assuming you know what you are talking about, from reading just a few words if any at all of someone's arguement because you believe something so strongly, and then laying out a counter arguement based on those assumtions seems pretty irrational as well.
Yet another good example, thank you for your assistance.

reply to post by ashamedamerican



Has it ever occured to you that the people who use religions for BAD or for evil may be Athiests and not religious people at all ...(they are in disguise as religious peoples)..If they were truly religious peoples they would not be doing any evil in the name of their God...unless of course that god is satan or mankind (self) .....In other words if THEY DID TRULY BELIEVE IN GOD ..they would not be doing so much evil in his name ......An Athiest does not believe in any GOD and would be more apt to commit evils since he has no one he feels he would be accountable to .....
.......
There are WOLVES among the SHEEP who are involved heavily in all religions all for the purpose of deceiving the masses and controlling the flock .....
And the outcome is pretty clear ....to make the world HATE HATE HATE ...and KILL KILL KILL ..

reply to post by Simplynoone


Yes it did occur to me, but then I remembered what a jihadist/martyr was.
Sure, maybe some of them didn't believe in god, but we can all agree that the vast majority did.